Heritage Resources, Inc. v. Caterpillar Financial Services Corp. (2009)

green · 91 citation events across 11 courts. Showing the 18 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).

All Green 18

Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then

200920172026

Sort: By significance · Most recent

green Helena Agri-Enterprises, LLC v. AAA Turf, Inc. (2023)

Rule Authority · 6th Cir.

Corp., 774 N.W.2d 332, 345 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).

green Pamella Montgomery v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc. (2016)

Rule Authority · 6th Cir.

In Pack , we explained that “Michigan has abandoned the privity requirement for implied-warranty claims,” 434 F.3d at 820 , and Heritage left that proposition unchanged, 774 N.W.2d at 344 (noting confusion about whether the lack of contractual privity bars implied-warranty claims and refusing to address the issue).

noting confusion about whether the lack of contractual privity bars implied-warranty claims and refusing to address the issue

green Charles Farley v. Country Coach Incorporated (2010)

Rule Authority · 6th Cir.

Corp., 284 Mich.App. 617 , 774 N.W.2d 332, 343 (2009) (“[0]ur Supreme Court ... has previously held that for some remote purchasers it is unnecessary in actions for breach of implied warranty to establish privity of contract with the manufacturer.” (citing Piercefield v. Remington Arms Co., 375 Mich. 85 , 133 N.W.2d 129, 134-35 (1965))); see also Jetts v. Stewart Bldg.

“[0]ur Supreme Court ... has previously held that for some remote purchasers it is unnecessary in actions for breach of implied warranty to establish privity of contract with the manufacturer.” (citing Piercefield v. Remington Arms Co., 375 Mich. 85 , 133 N.W.2d 129, 134-35 (1965))

green Ron Vanalstine v. Land O'Lakes Purina Feeds LLC (2018)

Quote Authority · Mich. Ct. App. · 3 citations in this opinion

Heritage Resources , 284 Mich. App. at 632 , 774 N.W.2d 332 .

"If there is no warranty because of a valid disclaimer, there is no problem of limiting warranty breach remedies."

green In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig. (2018)

Quote Authority · N.D. Cal. · 2 citations in this opinion

Corp. , 284 Mich.App. 617 , 774 N.W.2d 332 , 343 (2009) ("[The Michigan] Supreme Court...has previously held that for some remote purchasers it is unnecessary in actions for breach of implied warranty to establish privity of contract with the manufacturer.").

"[The Michigan] Supreme Court...has previously held that for some remote purchasers it is unnecessary in actions for breach of implied warranty to establish privity of contract with the manufacturer."

green James v. iMoney Tools LLC (2025)

Rule Authority · D. Utah

Corp., 774 N.W.2d 332, 345 (Mich. App. 2009)).

green Shaker v. Champion Petfoods USA, Inc. (2022)

Quote Authority · E.D. Mich.

Corp., 774 N.W.2d 332 , 343 n.12 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009) (“[P]rivity of contract is necessary for a remote purchaser to enforce a manufacturer’s express warranty.”)).

“[P]rivity of contract is necessary for a remote purchaser to enforce a manufacturer’s express warranty.”

green Lau v. Constable (2022)

Rule Authority · N.C. Bus. Ct.

Corp., 284 Mich. App. 617, 642 (2009) (holding that the broad language used in a settlement sufficed to release all claims because “[t]here cannot be any broader classification than the word ‘all[,]’ ” which “leaves no room for exceptions”). 2 The Court has not been presented with sufficient reason why the same rationale should not also apply to the transfer of “claims, causes of action, choses in action, rights of recovery and rights of set-off of any kind” by way of sale.

holding that the broad language used in a settlement sufficed to release all claims because “[t]here cannot be any broader classification than the word ‘all[,]’ ” which “leaves no room for exceptions”

green Livonia, City of v. Aquatic Renovation Systems, Inc. d/b/a Renosys Corporation (2022)

Rule Authority · E.D. Mich.

Corp., 774 N.W.2d 332, 341 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).

green Robert Murray v. Chesapeake Energy Corp (2020)

Quote Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

See Dresden v Detroit Macomb Hosp Corp, 218 Mich App 292, 297-298 ; 553 NW2d 387 (1996) (discussing the broad nature of release language pertaining “ ‘any and all’ causes of action” and concluding that it applied to bar a fraud claim); Heritage Resources, Inc v Caterpillar Fin Servs Corp, 284 Mich App 617, 642 ; 774 NW2d 332 (2009) (“There cannot be any broader classification than the word ‘all.’ In its ordinary and natural meaning, the word ‘all’ leaves no room for exceptio…

“There cannot be any broader classification than the word ‘all.’ In its ordinary and natural meaning, the word ‘all’ leaves no room for exceptions.”

green Carrigg v. General R.V. Center, Inc. (2019)

Rule Authority · E.D. Mich.

Corp., 774 N.W.2d 332, 342 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009) (quoting Salzman v. Maldaver, 24 N.W.2d 161, 165 (Mich. 1946)).

quoting Salzman v. Maldaver, 24 N.W.2d 161, 165 (Mich. 1946)

green John L Roseman v. Gwen Weiger (2019)

Quote Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

Houghton v Keller, 256 Mich App 336, 339-340 ; 662 NW2d 854 (2003). -7- and all’ causes of action” and concluding that it applied to bar a fraud claim); Heritage Resources, Inc v Caterpillar Fin Servs Corp, 284 Mich App 617, 642 ; 774 NW2d 332 (2009) (“ ‘[T]here cannot be any broader classification than the word “all.” In its ordinary and natural meaning, the word “all” leaves no room for exceptions.’ ”) (citation omitted).

“ ‘[T]here cannot be any broader classification than the word “all.” In its ordinary and natural meaning, the word “all” leaves no room for exceptions.’ ”

green In Re Scba Liquidation, Inc. (2011)

Rule Authority · Bankr. W.D. Mich.

Corp., 284 Mich.App. 617 , 774 N.W.2d 332, 341-42 (2009) (concluding that Michigan law requires privity of contract “for a remote purchaser to enforce a manufacturer’s express warranty ”) (emphasis added).

concluding that Michigan law requires privity of contract “for a remote purchaser to enforce a manufacturer’s express warranty ”

green Ron Vanalstine v. Diversified Farms LLC (2021)